Tuesday, January 1

The Fate Of Our Nation-Must read and Happy New Year!

"Be sober-minded, be watchful. Your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, looking for someone to devour." (1 Peter 5:8 ESV)

"... this is to be asserted in general of men, that they are
ungrateful, fickle, false, cowardly, covetous, and as long as you succeed
they are yours entirely; they will offer you their blood, property, life,
and children, as is said above, when the need is far distant; but when it
approaches they turn against you."

Many have wondered how a civilized
country like Germany could become the evil regime we now know as the Third
Reich. To those looking at Germany from the outside, it seemed as though the whole country had descended into an unfathomable moral
darkness. It could be argued that a gang of wild beasts and misfits had somehow managed to hijack the entire nation, but as the historian Laurence Rees discovered, the Nazis were actually embraced by much of the populace. The Gestapo
have traditionally been seen as an all-powerful agency inflicting the will of the
Fuehrer upon the people but as Rees found out, there were only a small
number of Gestapo agents, and the public willingly collaborated with them by
spying on their fellow citizens.

This phenomenon occurred throughout
German society. We know now that medical doctors, the last people one
would expect to deliberately harm others, were lining up to commit
atrocities as part of the Aktion T4 program, which was run by Reichsleiter Phillipp Bouhler and Adolf Hitler's personal physician, Dr. Karl Brandt.

Hitler's biographer Ian Kershaw has provided us with an important theory which
explains how the Nazis implemented their policies, and became more
radical with the passing of time. The Nazi regime has been described as
chaotic, but in fact it ran according to fundamental Darwinian
principles. The Fuehrer believed that his subordinates should fight
amongst themselves, and the most able and committed Nazis would rise to
positions of power in the Third Reich.The absence of clearly defined orders
from Hitler has vexed many historians who have tried to explain the
existence of the death camps. Kershaw cites a speech by Werner Willikens, who worked for the Nazi regime: "Everyone who
has the opportunity to observe it knows that the Fuehrer can hardly
dictate from above everything he intends to realize sooner or later. On
the contrary, up till now everyone with a post in the new Germany has
worked best when he has, so to speak, worked towards the Fuehrer." 1
(Niedersachisches Staatsarchiv, Oldenburg, Best. 131, nr. 303, fol. 1131v, speech by Werner Willikens, State Secretary in the Ministry of Food, 21 Feb. 1934; trans. Noakes and Pridham, Nazism, ii. 207, quoted in Kershaw, I., Hitler, The Germans, and The Final Solution, Yale University Press, Kindle loc. 596)Devout Nazis worked towards the Fuehrer
by perpetrating crimes they believed he would approve of, and in the
Third Reich, there was no legal or moral reason to restrict their
policies or behavior in any way. The Nazis treated their enemies with
the utmost brutality from day one. The most ruthless anti-Semitic
measures were therefore taken and in accordance with the principles of the theory
of evolution, there was no going backwards. The Nazis' policies could
only become more radical until eventually, they arrived at a final solution to die Judenfrage. In the Third Reich, all roads led inevitably to the death camps.

We know then, that the men accused of war crimes after
the war ended were not just following orders. They chose to embrace evil
and they tried their damndest to implement the Nazis' absurd social engineering theories.The journalist Caroline Glick has
argued that the second world war didn't break out just because of militarism
or nationalism. And that is correct. If Poland had SAM missile batteries along her borders, a couple of squadrons of
F-16s and a battalion of Merkava Mark IVs in August of 1939, that
wouldn't have caused the war, it would have prevented it. The war began
because the German state embraced evil, and the appeasers in the West
(and there were many who refused to accept what Winston Churchill was
saying about the Nazis) stood and watched them. (Glick, C., The Ghosts of Wars Lost,
Jerusalem Post 30/08/07) As Churchill himself wrote in his war memoirs,
there was every opportunity in the 1930s for Western powers to build up
their own military forces and prevent the Nazi regime from gaining
power in Europe, but the personal failings of the political elite, their refusal
to face the truth about the Nazis, their desire for personal power and
their intellectual cowardice did not achieve peace in the face of evil but instead, led to that evil being loosed upon Europe, and the
world. (Churchill, W., The Gathering Storm, Mariner Books, p. 80)

That is the answer to the question of how a civilised nation can
descend into a condition of depravity and evil, and pull the whole world
into a global conflict that will cost the lives of millions of people.Can this ever happen again? The
philosopher Isaiah Berlin once said that the belief that any final
solution exists to the question of how people ought to live is not only
false, but has brought to humanity incalculable suffering, horror and
death. (Berlin, I., Two Concepts of Liberty, Philosopedia)
The latest answer to the question of how human beings are to live, the
one our current crop of politicians believe in - their final solution -
is multiculturalism.Politicians today are fallible men
and women, no better either morally or intellectually than the
politicians described by Winston Churchill in The Gathering Storm. And their final solution - multiculturalism - is incoherent. Multiculturalists claim that all
cultures are equal, but in order to make that claim one needs a
yardstick to measure different cultures, and that entails a belief in
the very thing that multiculturalists deny: a set of ultimate values.

If
it is true that any worldview one adopts is based only on local
circumstances, and using any particular set of
local values to judge the values and practices of other cultures is illegitimate, then
that applies to multiculturalism as well. So multiculturalists have no
basis on which to say anyone who disagrees with them is wrong. According
to what they say they believe, the other person is just as right as they are.
Their final solution therefore undermines itself.

That
doesn't stop our politicians from trying to implement impractical and
illogical social engineering policies based on their final solution,
just as the Nazis did with their ridiculous theories. The
Nazis attacked their political opponents and silenced dissenting voices from the beginning.
And anyone living in Europe today who makes the obvious philosophical
observation that Islamic doctrines are incompatible with human liberty
is liable to be prosecuted by the state, for one offence or another. We
have seen this fate befall Tommy Robinson, Geert Wilders and Elisabeth
Sabaditch-Wolff in recent years.

In
Britain, the state not only flexes its own muscles in order to restrict
free speech, it recruits its own citizens to police one another, so
that human beings living in what is supposed to be a free and democratic
society will practice state-sanctioned self-censorship.

One of the ways they do this is by lying about multiculturalism. They claim it is the cure for
all our societal ills. But if you go to see your GP and they write you a
prescription, you must only take the appropriate dosage of medication. One
tablet may make you feel better, but it does not follow that taking two
or three tablets will make you feel better still. As we all know, taking too much of any
medication can do more harm than good.Most Brits enjoy having people from different countries living here. We all like music and food from different cultures, and we've probably all worked with extremely capable people from all around the world. But it does not follow that the doctrines of Islam, in particular, are compatible with human liberty. It is logically and morally possible to hold the former position, and at the same time to understand that the latter assertion is false. To put it another way: You really can have too much of a good thing.

The British government and their comrades in the media won't hear of this though. The party line is that multiculturalism can cure anything and everything, and the more we take of it the better we'll all feel. This is their final solution to the question of how we must live, and no deviation of opinion is to be permitted.

It's worth noting here that Adolf Hitler considered it necessary to inflict "spiritual terror" upon one's political opponents. He
wrote in Mein Kampf that a barrage of lies and slander must be
unleashed against one's opponents until
the nerves of the people being attacked wore down. Hitler thought that this
tactic would lead to political success with almost mathematical certainty. (Hitler, A., Mein Kampf, pp. 43-44, quoted in Shirer, W., The Rise and Fall of The Third Reich, Rosetta Books, Kindle loc. 620)

British citizens have been led to believe that by reading the contents of the koran and the hadith, then criticizing the doctrines of Islam found therein, one is guilty of the offence of racism, despite the fact that books have no genetic component. Not only can one be arrested for speaking the truth about Islamic doctrines and history in England today (aka using "insulting words"), British citizens are taught to believe that racism is behind any criticism of multiculturalism, that racism is evil, therefore to avoid being considered evil, they must practice strict self-censorship and not openly criticize multiculturalism.

Any British citizen who has taken the time to read the koran and the hadith, and who has studied Islamic doctrines and history, knows only too well the "spiritual terror" that awaits anyone who speaks the truth about those subjects within the borders of their own nation state.The state has tried to establish a false paradigm where multiculturalism is the ultimate good and any dissent whatsoever, rather than being seen as a symptom of a healthy society which has embraced the principles of free speech, is taken to be a symptom of an evil that exists within their own citizens' hearts. The powers-that-be today in the UK today have abandoned rational thinking and morality and are using moves straight out of the Nazis' playbook.

"Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will recognize them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes, or figs from thistles?"

Many people in the UK today accept whatever our government tells them out of intellectual laziness, or stupidity, or because they have chosen to embrace the forces which seek to destroy
everything our grandfathers stood for, and fought for, during World War II.Satan still prowls about the earth like a lion, looking for people to devour. British citizens are now doing what our mortal enemies, the Nazis, did before and during the war. They're helping the state to enforce a logically and morally incoherent ideology. Silencing dissent. Working to reduce human liberty.The beginning of a new year is traditionally a time to take stock, to reassess our lives and choose a different path. If anyone who reads this essay considers the issues that have been presented here, and comes to the conclusion that Britain is heading down a slippery slope to a new form of tyranny, then it is time to ask yourself: What am I going to do about it?